Abstract
The creation and musealization of parks and environmental protection areas are not absolutely symbolic constructive processes without contradictions. As with the case of public heritage, the methods to justify choices or establish hierarchies are always restricted to the specific, specialized, and temporal gaze. As a preconceived understanding which permeates the entire process, the protection and communication of space guide certain perceptions which are usually fragmented. These are not neutral procedures, since they carry with them values, knowledge, and paradigms. Rarely do they lead to the divergence of perceptions; rather, they tend to homogenize one formally accepted thought in a certain space and time, which is not always contextualized against its original tensions and potentialities. This article discusses issues that remain current and create discomfort in the processes of protecting and musealization of parks, areas, territories, and landscapes associated with environmental preservation or natural heritage policies. Notable among these issues are the notions of spectacularization, mythification, sustainability, and branding. Can nature be musealized, or only the landscape? What distinguishes these two concepts? In an attempt to answer these and other questions, ethical-philosophical approaches and distinctions are presented, along with the processes of environmental preservation and full heritage, from the perspective of their historical epistemology.
Keywords
Musealization; Nature; Landscape; Spectacularization; Sustainability